July 10, 2009

Friday 090710

Rest Day


View image

2009 CrossFit Games Set-up

"Twins" by Jeff Tincher, CrossFit Fairfax - video [wmv] [mov]

Rowing Lessons with Peter Dreissigacker by CrossFit Again Faster, Concept II, CrossFit Journal Preview - video [wmv] [mov]

2009 CrossFit Games Individual Competition Event 1

CrossFit by Overload arrives at the Games - video [wmv] [mov]

"The State Despotic" by Mark Steyn - The Wall Street Journal

Post thoughts to comments.

Posted by lauren at July 10, 2009 7:27 AM

Good luck everyone at the games! Safe travels to everyone going out there!

Comment #1 - Posted by: in8girl at July 9, 2009 6:04 PM


Comment #2 - Posted by: franiel at July 9, 2009 6:05 PM

the set up looks sick! Best of luck to Tanya and Josh Wagner who are gonna kill it this year at the games!!

Comment #3 - Posted by: Mike Cappi at July 9, 2009 6:08 PM

Go FitMom go!

Comment #4 - Posted by: cookie at July 9, 2009 6:30 PM

I spy...

225# deadlifts, wall balls, 500m rows, 20-24" box jumps, 45# hang squat cleans, and plenty of space for burpees.

Comment #5 - Posted by: Shane S at July 9, 2009 6:31 PM

My quads can really use the rest day. Thanks!

Comment #6 - Posted by: Unreal at July 9, 2009 6:32 PM

Good luck to all the athletes at the games!
I wish you strength and confidence.

I spent a whole day dealing with MEPS and all I want to do is make up yesterdays run WOD; Crossfit is so much fun.

Comment #7 - Posted by: FoxJr. at July 9, 2009 6:33 PM

Man, I can't wait to go to the games. NorCal qualifiers kicked ass! It's gonna be hard to sleep tonight...it's like tomorrow is Christmas!

Comment #8 - Posted by: Bryan at July 9, 2009 6:39 PM

To Heather Keenan and the CFNE crew, go get some and breath fire and raise some hell.
To members of the FRAT making the trip- hugs, bad English, and love for all. Keep the CrossFit community strong!

Comment #9 - Posted by: Phoenix at July 9, 2009 6:54 PM

Do we know if the games will be streamed of vid's posted to journal or on the site? Sucks not to be out there.

Comment #10 - Posted by: BradH at July 9, 2009 6:57 PM

Good Luck to everyone this weekend! Can't wait to see what insanity happens this year!

Comment #11 - Posted by: Allan at July 9, 2009 7:01 PM

Anyone know where to get cheap almond butter?

Comment #12 - Posted by: Nate and Laura at July 9, 2009 7:11 PM

good luck to all competitors especially Steve, Taz, Chris and Nadine from Oz - go you good things

Comment #13 - Posted by: Rookie - Crossfit Gold Coast at July 9, 2009 7:17 PM

Continuous coverage of the Games All Weekend at www.twitter.com/roadtothegames --- Official Dispatches, as well as http://games2009.crossfit.com

Comment #14 - Posted by: Paul Szoldra at July 9, 2009 7:18 PM

Just started crossfit this week. The legs are thankful for the rest day, but the upper body feels underworked. Any thoughts?

Comment #15 - Posted by: Alex at July 9, 2009 7:23 PM

Regarding the article:

"To the new Administration, American exceptionalism means an exceptional effort to harness an exceptionally big government in the cause of exceptionally massive spending."

"Reagan showed us that deficits don't matter" - Dick Cheney

Where was the whining when Cheney said that? Government got HUGE under Bush. Obama is forced to fix the mess created by Bush, Greenspan and their libertarian economic ideology.

Comment #16 - Posted by: Jacko at July 9, 2009 7:29 PM

@15 - Alex

Give it time... pretty soon you'll be wondering what you did to Coach to get the 3 days straight of presses or push ups and pull ups. :-)

Good luck to all the competitors!

The games really need to make their way to ESPN.

Comment #17 - Posted by: mikednj m/28/5'11''/210 at July 9, 2009 7:31 PM

Owww... legs.... hurt...


Comment #18 - Posted by: Matt 23/m/185 at July 9, 2009 7:39 PM

Looking for some music help here -

Watch this:

What's the name of the song? Anyone? Been on my mind for days and I can't recall.

Comment #19 - Posted by: Tom at July 9, 2009 7:44 PM

Is it hard to set up a webcast? I really don't know, but it sure would be great to be able to see some of the events on the web. Live on tv will be the best. Maybe in a few years.

Comment #20 - Posted by: MACK at July 9, 2009 7:45 PM

I personally don't see this article as an attack on the current administration. It did have it's moments of criticism. However, I thought the overall theme of the article was the willingness of the American people to allow their freedom and liberty to be taken from them with little more than a whimper in response.
Some Americans watch the news. Even fewer have an educated opinion. Almost nobody gets involved in local politics.
In fact, I would agree with the article in that we have allowed the original American system of government that was designed to protect to the right to life, liberty, and property to morph into a system that provides for and sustains the herd.

Comment #21 - Posted by: tripp at July 9, 2009 8:04 PM

Jacko, time to stop blaming Bush. These are Obama's deficits now. This is from Camille Paglia, a Democrat and supporter of Obama: “ Within the U.S., the Obama presidency will be mainly measured by the success or failure of his economic policies. And here, I fear, the monstrous stimulus package with which this administration stumbled out of the gate will prove to be Obama's Waterloo. All the backtracking and spin doctoring in the world will not erase that major blunder, which made the new president seem reckless, naive and out of control of his own party, which was in effect dictating to him from Capitol Hill. The GOP has failed thus far to gain traction only because it is trudging through a severe talent drought. “

With cap and trade, and the health plan, and his future spending plans, we’re headed for truly massive future debts. Our hope is now with the Blue Dog Democrats to stop this stuff.

Comment #22 - Posted by: blades at July 9, 2009 8:08 PM

My calfs were killin me while i was doing the pose running and not my upper legs, was i doin it wrong?


Comment #23 - Posted by: Trevor Baggs at July 9, 2009 8:15 PM

The Games need to be a Pay per view event!

Comment #24 - Posted by: Los at July 9, 2009 8:16 PM

I wish I could go! Maybe next year.

Comment #25 - Posted by: Adam at July 9, 2009 8:27 PM

Many of the questions raised by the aricle seem to be answerable only by historical, not philosphical inquiry.

What was the historical process by which decision making power has moved out of the hands of local representative bodies (and their delegates) to bodies (and their delegates) sitting closer to the federal and state sovereigns?

How and why did this happen? What specific events marked this trend? Would a consideration of the actual historical circumstances in which these events took place support the contention that white male Americans have tended to trade in their liberty for increased security since, let's say, 1861, and that everyone else has tended to trade in their liberty for security since, let's say, 1933?

What was being traded for what?

If a person was never offered service X before that service was offerred or provided by the sovereign (and its delegates), is it accurate to say that by allowing the sovereign to provide that service to him or her, he or she has given up some of her freedom? has traded her freedom for security? If so, what was the nature of the freedom that person gave up?

Don't get me wrong, the spending spooks me. I worry about centralization of power and of creating uncontrollable bureaucracies that develop an undertandable interest in keeping their jobs, and so may put themselves and "their programs" above the public interest.

Comment #26 - Posted by: Prole at July 9, 2009 8:56 PM

I have a Brand New Sharpie. Let's not mob me people. There will be 3 full days for me sign autographs and pose for pictures.

Remember we are they to watch the finest competitors on earth compete. Please don't make my presence a distraction.

Thank you

The Great and Powerful jakers

Comment #27 - Posted by: jakers at July 9, 2009 8:57 PM

Great WSJ article. Time to wake up America!!!

Forget PPV...I wanna watch it free on ESPN baby!!!! Let's press those boys over htere to jump on board the CF train.

Comment #28 - Posted by: PunchyUSMC (m/33/5'7"/175) at July 9, 2009 9:00 PM

Nate and Laura- cheap almond butter can be found @ Trader Joe's. Hope there is one near you, great store.

Oh Lordy, a rest day article that references the Norwegian Blue, pining for the fjords. Kamper, you must read this.

Man, Goat is going to be so mad that he is missing out on this discussion. Then again, he's going to be at the Games, so I don't think he's going to mind all THAT much :)

At times I think my *brain* gets DOMs from rest day articles. Well really, not the articles themselves, but the discussions that follow- you guys post some lengthy answers and go back and forth over several points, hard to keep track sometimes on my little blackberry!

I enjoy reading the articles, as well as following the posts throughout the day. I have been RestDay-ing since March. As with my WODs, my progress is slow, but improving over time. I look things up, check out recommended or cited works/links, ask my dad questions, and just generally use the left side of my brain, which is hard for me. I think in pictures or sounds, and have a difficult time with logic and numbers, and following debates.

I used to think I was stupid or had a learning disability because of this. I used to marvel at the long posts, thinking, don't any of these people WORK? How do they have time to write all that? (It took a long time to write this post because I had to keep rearranging it - my thoughts are so scattered, they just seem to fall out of my head)

I've slowly come to realize that *other* people don't have the problems I do with organizing their thoughts. LOL dang it. It really *is* just me.

Comment #29 - Posted by: Strong Lil Pony! at July 9, 2009 9:12 PM

jakers- get in line behind ME & Cookie, dude. mmmmm Barbie dances at the PBPB definitely trump autographed pics of the G&PJ!

Comment #30 - Posted by: Strong Lil Pony! at July 9, 2009 9:16 PM

find em hot, leave em wet! let's go any firefighters competing in the games! good luck to everyone

Comment #31 - Posted by: Todd at July 9, 2009 9:20 PM

Shut your mouth girl.

Dancing girls never trump a funny man.

Do they?

Comment #32 - Posted by: jakers at July 9, 2009 9:27 PM

the article's premise is pretty much flawed. obama was voted into office by a majority of voters who very clearly support (maybe now given the problems associated with tax-spend policy, supportED) the president's economic agenda. to some extent, democratic government means that you will be subject to the 'tyranny of the majority' - as tocqueville put it. get over it. it's over in 3 years. (yes, I am a republican who still doesn't understand why palin was chosen)

on another level, tocqueville was a spoiled french aristocrat who was afraid of losing his unearned income and land. same could be said about a lot of our (GASP) founding fathers.

for all of the libertarian ideology that's thrown around here, i wonder why thomas paine's idea of a 100% inheritance tax doesn't gain much traction? think about it, everybody, upon turning 18, starts with a blank slate and blank income and only has his/her income to lift his/herself through misery. in my humble opinion, i think that's the real hard work ethic

then again, it's my firm (perhaps unfounded) belief that a lot of the libertarian talk about 'freedom' is just a way to dress up monetary selfishness under the guise of virtue.

Comment #33 - Posted by: tj at July 9, 2009 9:51 PM

Only read the first third of the "State Despotic" article, but already think it's spot on. I really only want one right from my government-liberty. We are trading percieved fiscal security (actually even more indebted servitude) for ever more government regulation. I'm retiring from the Navy just in time for all of us to be wards of the state.

I need to make up a WoD anyway, so this will inspire me.

Comment #34 - Posted by: John "Bur" at July 9, 2009 9:52 PM

"Screw the state"... awesome article

Comment #35 - Posted by: jeff at July 9, 2009 10:10 PM

Here's the team that's gonna win it.. Indycrossfit.. might as well just give us the trophy now.

Comment #36 - Posted by: rodrigo Iglesias at July 9, 2009 10:58 PM

nice video Rory

Comment #37 - Posted by: T.Burnley at July 9, 2009 10:59 PM

Good luck to all at the games. Enjoy the unmarked hill.

Comment #38 - Posted by: Jaywolf at July 9, 2009 11:04 PM

to the Twins Clip....


you`re loosin`to much speed at your finish. Bring your hands away much faster from your body...and do not stop at this position. The only part where you can stop the movement of your legs, is where you bring your hands back from the pulling movement, to the rollin`forward movement...impressive clip..very impressive...with this little form correction, you will save a lot more energy!!


Tibor from Zürich, Switzerland

Comment #39 - Posted by: Tibor at July 9, 2009 11:24 PM

help! My legs! I can't get out of bed...

Comment #40 - Posted by: badash at July 10, 2009 1:00 AM

Mark Steyn has some valid points. But his philosophy should not be mixed too much with todays politics, I doubt his main focus is republican=good and democrats=bad. His focus is a bit bigger than that, namely that noone cares anymore. If only 10% of the ppl actually WORK for democracy/freedom, it´s doomed. The rest of us are comfortable as long as we have a warm house and food on the table.

Funny that all the problems that were created during 8 years OVER NIGHT suddenly are the current administrations fault.

Comment #41 - Posted by: Peter at July 10, 2009 1:15 AM

Just a little defense for Europe: I think we do have more regulations because Europe is populated much more densely than the US. For example Germany has a population density of 596/sq mi, compared to 80/sq mi in the US. So you logically have more freedom (in a very literal sense).
I also think that his comparison with medieval society is flawed. While the king was certainly far away, the local nobles were not (feudalism)and neither was the church, claiming 10% of everything people earned.
But otherwise I totally agree with #35. The state is nothing but a waste of paper, time and money. A cheer for H.D Thoreau!

Comment #42 - Posted by: Dieke at July 10, 2009 3:26 AM

Anyone know the time difference from Cali too Iraq?

Comment #43 - Posted by: bro at July 10, 2009 3:37 AM

# 43 about 12 hours

I did yesterdays WOD today, first one as rx'd so I'm stoked about that...Did it in 17:12 on a 1/4 mile track.. not so stoked on the time. I'm not sure if 1/4 mile is longer than 400m, I sure hope so!

Comment #44 - Posted by: jhes160 at July 10, 2009 4:24 AM

My WOD was "Nancy"

5 Rds of:
75lb Overhead squat

15:00 M/40/5'8"/155

Comment #45 - Posted by: Jon at July 10, 2009 4:32 AM

Good luck at the Games!! 3.2.1...GO!!!

Comment #46 - Posted by: Chuck O at July 10, 2009 4:33 AM

Someone from the main site once asked the rhetorical question: can you ever get enough of Jeff Tincher.

No. Never.

My first Tincher sighting was in March 07. I've been on the lookout ever since.

I am going to watch that video again, watch him at the games this weekend, and keep a sharp eye out for any Tincher sightings I can get in NOVA.

Jeff, you're a gentleman and a great leader. You're also a delight to watch, and I've frequently considered moving to Fairfax and setting my house on fire just to have you over.

3,2,1 Go!

Comment #47 - Posted by: Spider Chick at July 10, 2009 5:16 AM

There has been a long build up to where we are right now. Capitalism has caused injustice - people get to vote in America. They voted for Obama - in some cases, due to injustice. The pharmaceutical companies took priority over the people. Health care was limited to those with good jobs, and society is tired of poverty in the cities and among certain ethnic groups.

The federal government has responded to injustices for many years now. So now "we" are going after guns as a response to the insane level of gun violence caused in part by the drastic inequity here in America.

I agree that freedom is falling apart in the US and is a serious issue. Every bill that comes out of Washington scares me - what now. But Republicans are as guilty as Dems. The abortion issue is a perfect example. I believe that there are too many laws being passed and too much money being spent (for years). But local government has not acted in a responsible manner.

I think that Obama is there for a reason. Bush's incompetence got him elected. He just didn't care about the people.

Comment #48 - Posted by: Jerry Gones at July 10, 2009 5:27 AM

tj - comment 33

"on another level, tocqueville was a spoiled french aristocrat who was afraid of losing his unearned income and land. same could be said about a lot of our (GASP) founding fathers."

They were so afraid that they became traitors to England by signing the Declaration of Independence and guaranteeing their death if we lost the revolutionary war - many of them loosing everything including $$, land, family members and their own lives despite our victory

Comment #49 - Posted by: cl at July 10, 2009 6:09 AM

#44, a quarter mile track is in fact a 400m.

Comment #50 - Posted by: go zags at July 10, 2009 6:32 AM

Would someone be kind enough to put the wod's for the games on this portion of the site? My work won't let me to the main games site and I was wondering what Saturday will be like. Thanks and good luck to everyone out at Aromas.

Comment #51 - Posted by: Paul at July 10, 2009 6:32 AM

Matt - Here is the posting from the games site (http://games2009.crossfit.com)

General Rules
1. The movement standards are typical HQ unless otherwise stated.
2. Each athlete will be ranked according to their time or score relative to the other athletes for that workout. Their final score for the workout will be equal to their rank.
3. The overall ranking going into each event will determine the reverse starting order for that event. For example, the athletes that win the first event will get to go last in the second event, while the athletes that come in last in the first event must go first in the second. The athletes in the lead (those with the lowest running total) after two events get to go last in the third event. And so forth.
4. After the second event, the bottom ten men and the bottom ten women (those with the most points) will be eliminated from the competition.
5. After the fourth event, the remaining bottom ten men and ten women will be eliminated from the competition. At this point, there will be approximately 55 athletes competing in Saturday's final event (for each men and women).
6. After the fifth event, the 16 men and 16 women with the lowest total points will be invited to compete on Sunday. If by chance there is a tie for 16th place, the athlete with the best single placement in any of the five events will be awarded the invite.

Event 1 - The Run
The first event is a 7.1km run through varied terrain including both asphalt and extremely steep hills off trail. The athlete's time will be electronically determined by a chip given to the athlete prior to the race.

Event 2 - The Deadlift
Heaviest successful deadlift completed lifting one rep every 30sec. Each competitor will begin at the first barbell, which weighs 315lbs for men and 185lbs for women. Dropping is permitted. The athlete then has 10sec plus any portion of the 20sec remaining to set up at the next bar, which is 10lbs heavier than the previous (so the second bar weighs 325/195). Athletes continue moving to progressively heavier bars until they fail. The athletes are ranked according to the heaviest successful weight lifted before failing.

Event 3 - The Sandbag Hill Sprint
The men will pick up two 35lb sandbags (loosely packed) and sprint approximately 170m uphill. The sandbags begin flat on the ground. The sprint is steep in places, with approximately 100' in elevation gain over the 170m course. Women carry one 35lb sandbag for the same course.

Event 4 - Row / Hammer Stake
Row 500m
Hammer a 4' metal stake into specially prepared, evenly compacted ground (women use a 3' stake)
Row 500m
Details and standards will be given to the athletes on Saturday afternoon.

Event 5 - The Couplet
The two exercises are wallball and barbell snatch. The specifics of the workout will be disclosed on Saturday afternoon. We want the athletes to have the privilege of being the first to perform this exact workout.

Comment #52 - Posted by: Brandon at July 10, 2009 6:37 AM

Sorry...post previous was for Paul...reminder not to post before coffee is consumed!

Comment #53 - Posted by: Brandon at July 10, 2009 6:39 AM

Tj 33

Like you, and Paine, Warren Buffet, Andrew Carnegie, I would like to see a very, very, very heavy inheritance/estate tax or some other form of wealth redistribution at death. Also like you, I am suspicious that much libertarian rhetoric is aimed at dressing up "monetary selfishness under the guise of virtue". If it is the labour of the individual that founds her right to property and wealth, makes her possession of those things a virtue, then she should rely on her own labour, and not that of her mommy and daddy. In addition to creating "just" relationships to property, such a tax would make make any tendency to plutochracy much less likely.

The question is: once you tax all that money, what do you do with it?

Paine said: give everyone the same lump sum at age 18 and let the race begin.

I sense many libertarians want the "right" (a property right, the so-called "foundation" of all the other "legitimate" rights) to a big head start in that race, or even to be born siting on the finish line.

Comment #54 - Posted by: Prole at July 10, 2009 6:54 AM

Founding Fathers as spoiled brats....now THAT is a new one.

Comment #55 - Posted by: julie parisien 5'8"/163/37 at July 10, 2009 7:00 AM

Legs are definitely sore this week, but in a good way. But does anyone know why my abs would be hurting so bad?

Comment #56 - Posted by: ToddF at July 10, 2009 7:06 AM

For some of you, it's just a rest-day discussion. But for those of us with 50-60 years left to live, it's the shark swimming below the boat. I've spent my youth and early adulthood learning, observing, seeing the founders homes and the battle fields where they died.

It's no longer just my feeling that our nation is in decline, it's essentially a reality, and far smarter people are writing about it.

Greatness is found at every level of society, and we as individuals need to realize that the present belongs to us, and shapes the future. I pray for those of you who still believe the issue belongs to one political affiliation or another, because no one man or affiliation owns ideas. Freedom was granted by our Creator, fought for by our founders, and is easily betrayed by our desires.

Comment #57 - Posted by: chris at July 10, 2009 7:53 AM

Prole (54), TJ (33)

On inheritance tax...
Take this hypothetic situation: Mr. Ideal Farmer owns a farm which was purchased by his father and has been working on it his entire life. He built his home on his land and all the buildings that the farm uses. He has maintained these buildings with the help of his sons and wants nothing more than his children to continue working on this farm long after he is gone. One day Mr. Ideal Farmer dies. In his will he leaves the farm, house, etc. to his children. Then along comes Mr. Tax Collector who says the government is entitled to 50% of whatever is left to the children. Unfortunately, the only assets Mr. Farmer left are physical assets, all his savings were reinvested in the land/buildings. Mr. Tax Collector values these assets at 1 million dollars (the value of the land has gone up since Mr. Farmer's farther originally purchased it) and says the children must either pay him half this sum or sell all the assets and give him half of the money they get for it.

Now is this a fair situation? What if we applied it to family heirlooms? An expensive painting that holds immense psychological value to a family, something they would never sell, yet has a significant monetary value. Should they be forced to sell it to give the government its "due". Obviously we would like to say, well in these situations the government wouldn't take their assets. But it wouldn't be too hard to see how such a rule could easily be abused by a wealthy family with plenty of lawyers and influence.

Anyway, don't think that I am dead-set against an inheritence tax, I'm still undecided. I just wanted to point out some flaws with the "let everyone start on equal footing" logic. As a wise man once said, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Comment #58 - Posted by: falk at July 10, 2009 7:59 AM

It seems each political rest day's topic response tend to go either "Bush did this so it's ok with Obama to do whatever"...and vice versa. I think you need to step back and throw out your bias and evaulate the topic with a fresh mind. It is absurd to respond by saying that Bush & Co spent like a drunken sailor so it is ok for Obama & Co to double down on spending. Just like how Bush grew gov like a druken sailor it is ok for Obama to double down. I personally believe we need to get most of the bums out and start new. Politicans are not working for joe citizen. They work for special interest so they can get reelected and related. You need to ask what is good for the majority of Americans.

Comment #59 - Posted by: trace at July 10, 2009 8:04 AM

julie parisien: "Founding Fathers as spoiled brats....now THAT is a new one."

Well, if they owned slaves, oversaw the decimation of people native to the continent, maybe an accusation of being spoiled is not so shocking.

"The question is: once you tax all that money, what do you do with it?

Paine said: give everyone the same lump sum at age 18 and let the race begin.

I sense many libertarians want the "right" (a property right, the so-called "foundation" of all the other "legitimate" rights) to a big head start in that race, or even to be born siting on the finish line."

I am not an American or a political scientist, just a casual foreign observer.
Wouldn't this be similar to socialism or communism? Not that I don't agree with Paine's statement, but it seems that many people would flip out if anything like this were even suggested. Just a thought.

And like Falk just stated, there are valid points to be made for both sides, so I;m not arguing absolutely for one or the other.

Comment #60 - Posted by: Geoff at July 10, 2009 8:07 AM

SLP #29, yes Mr. Steyn certainly has his python references straight. How can you not love the guy? But then he has to bash Dancing and Idol, two shows where the contestants need actual reconizable talent to prevail. As cultural artifacts, they aren't all that bad. Maybe Flava of Love pushed him too far over the top to even speak. :)

I agree with him enough to feel decidedly spooked after reading his article. Not sure which I fear more these days, the religious right or the bureaucratic left. The Scylla and Charybdis of our modern age. Maybe if we keep those two focused on each other, the rest of us can sail through.

Comment #61 - Posted by: Kamper M/45/74"/200 at July 10, 2009 8:13 AM

Can freedom be said to exist if other people decide how to spend YOUR money? Obviously, some freedoms must be relinquished to live in a civil society. You don't have the freedom to punch people in the nose because you feel like it.

Yet, if you pursue socialist logic, you wind up, inevitably, with generalized mediocrity and the cessation of the freedom to invest, spend, and work as you choose.

The argument is this:

Not all people are equal, currently, in their economic status.

This means some people have relative advantages in the race to greater wealth.

This means we need to restrict/slow down those people, and give head starts to others.

This means the talented are often held back, and the mediocre promoted, through the use of State backed force of law.

This necessarily means that the State has and uses the power to dictate individual opportunities, and hence freedom.

Talented people cannot be expected to abide this situation, so they either leave, or stop being productive.

Since this situation requires tax revenues from actually productive people, this means overall economic growth stalls and reverses.

This, in turn, requires ever more punitive and direct control of the "wealthy".

This, in turn, creates ever worsening economic conditions.

This, in turn, creates social unrest, with corresponding increases in State control of personal freedoms. Rationing of things, price controls, crime and punishment etc.

Look at New York City in the 1970's, or Detroit today, and this is PRECISELY the root of their problems. Nobody wants to invest money that they can't keep. Why would they? What wisdom or even basic understanding of human psychology would make anyone think otherwise?

Comment #62 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 10, 2009 8:20 AM

Here are a few rules of Capitalism.

1) Specific wealth always precedes general wealth. Roughly speaking, one millionaire creates 10 100,000-aires, who create 100 10,000-aires. As millionaires increase, so does general wealth, in a liberal democracy.

2) You can't make a dollar without someone else making a dollar.

3) Economic growth is not the result of "theft", but increases in productivity. It always has been. That is how GDP's grow for centuries straight.

4) Increases in productivity are best fueled by motivating people to innovate. Desire for gain is the most sound and reliable psychological motivation.

5) Sustained business health requires both the freedom to fail, and the freedom to succeed. Governments lack both the possibility of failure (they can take back lost "profits" in increased taxes, since they ARE the State), and the possibility of success. Success, for a burocracy, consists in increasing in size. This is necessarily and inevitably an increase in the tax burden on the actually productive.

Comment #63 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 10, 2009 8:26 AM

"Hammer a 4' metal stake into specially prepared, evenly compacted ground (women use a 3' stake)"

aka build for time. I should have had the games at my house. I need a good jungle gym for pullups and rings.

Comment #64 - Posted by: hax at July 10, 2009 8:35 AM

Finally a rest day!!! perfect day for an ab workout...

Comment #65 - Posted by: p0x at July 10, 2009 8:51 AM

Totally random question for anyone who might know. Who is the guy in the "Air Squat Demo w/explanations..." video? Wondering if he possibly posts info on CF, specifically about his diet ;P He is amazingly lean.

Comment #66 - Posted by: p0x at July 10, 2009 8:56 AM

#4~ I'm here in Aromas Cookie! C U soon!

Comment #67 - Posted by: Fit Mom in CT of CrossFit Persevere (F38/125/5'2") at July 10, 2009 9:02 AM

The State Despotic article is spot on.

If you always wanted to know what it was like to live in Western Europe....just stick around for 5-10 more years!!!

Comment #68 - Posted by: Gregorioz at July 10, 2009 9:28 AM

i dunno about the hammering event. it seems unrealistic that they really can be standardized so that every stake is the same. i think a lot of unforeseen problems could pop up during this event. i guess they know what there doing though and it will probably just be badass.

Comment #69 - Posted by: rock strongo at July 10, 2009 9:49 AM

This has nothing to do with the current topic, and for that I apologize. I also should post this on a WOD day as it would be sure to get more viewers.

But, I have to say that I cannot ever see myself joining a Crossfit affiliate again in my life. The reason being is that not one that I have researched in my area wants to follow the main page programming. I guess every former globo-gym junkie that has recently become Crossfit Level 1 certified seems to know better that Coach. To them I ask, what is wrong with the method (and sometimes madness!!) of the main page WODs? Are they not good or challenging enough? Did you not see the results that you wanted while you learned Crossfit, so you feel that you need to improve it?

One observation that I have made is that most affiliates that promote their own programming generally do not incorporate strength or long run days. It is generally, "gee, how can I smoke the hell out of my members to really prove that Crossfit is hard?".

To me, there seems to be no long term thought process to their methods. I could take a Level 1 course and learn about the programming theories, but I still don't have the experience to best Coach in his own ring, so to speak; and yes, I have been in the gyms for 15 years, read all of the magazines, played college sports, been in the Army and majored in Biology/Human Physiology in college - so I'm far from ignorant on the subject matter. However, with Coach's programming, I feel completely confident, after 2 years of Crossfitting, that he has a reason for every workout that he posts - both short and long term. But for most affiliates, I don't think that this is the case. It just irritates the hell out of me to see every Tom, Dick and Jane promoting their own idea of Crossfit to what I feel is an unknowing community, just because they want the credit for really "giving the client a good workout".

I guess when these random affiliates produce - with their own programming - icons like Nicole, Eva, Greg A, and others, then maybe I will give them a chance. Until then, they just seem to be egotistic trainers slowly degrading the Crossfit name.

* I would like to add that not all affiliates fit this criticism and some are very good at desiging their own programs. But these are the exceptions, as they generally have more experience in Crossfit as well as higher training certifications.

Comment #70 - Posted by: bryan at July 10, 2009 10:18 AM

Ok, there is DOMS, and then there is DOMS. My legs are soooo sore from the FS wod the other day. I can hardly walk, cannot go downstairs, and barely can make it up the stairs. Last night I did an epson salt bath, then ice packs, then more ice. I’ve got bengay slathered on my legs, and feel almost sick! So glad today is a rest day. I work two jobs today and have no idea how I am going to even stand up at job #2! Oh dear!

On the bright side, I am SO excited about the games! I keep wondering what is going on, how everyone is doing, etc. And the good news is, I actually have the internet at home now so any new posted news/ video clips, I can see! Whoopeee!

One day I will be in those games! *smile*


Comment #71 - Posted by: in8girl at July 10, 2009 10:20 AM

So, I was bored this morning around 4 am and could not sleep so I decided to kick my ass w/ a workout. In my tired state I came up with this.

Fran BUT with dumbells and on one foot. so I stood on the left foot only and did the right arm thrusters w/ a 45lbs dumbell, the switched arms and feet. I did both arms per set.

Wow. It was HARD!!!!!!!!!!

Comment #72 - Posted by: Jared at July 10, 2009 10:21 AM

Bryan #70.

I have only looked at one CF gym in my area, Crossfit Boston. While they do not follow the mainpage WODs they do seem to cover everything. As soon as I read your message I went to their page and saw that their wod was the following:
10 rounds for reps
Push press 155#
30 sec on
30 sec off

Sounds like a good combo of strength and stamina.

2 days ago it was Jerk 2-2-2-2-2.

I guess my point is that not all of the affiliates get into this "smoke em if you got em" mentality.

Comment #73 - Posted by: dan m at July 10, 2009 10:32 AM

Falk and Geoff

As far as the ideal farmer goes, yes that is fair. The kids mortgage the farm to pay the tax bill and then repay the mortgage through their own labour and industry through the course of their lives (I realize this comes close to making them lifetime renters of the farm). These kid-farmers do not profit from the labour of their father, just as a child of today, born to poor, lifetime wage-earner renting parents is unable to profit from the labour of her parents. If we could quantify how much labour the farm-kids had put into the farm before daddy died perhaps that could be deducted from the tax bill. Also, Bert and Ernie would have received their 50k (or whatever amount) at age 18 and could have put in the bank (or invested it) and used it to pay some of dad’s tax bill.

I realize this is off the cuff fantasy and would transform what we think of as “property rights”. No doubt, there are many problems with heavy inheritance taxes.

I always wonder, if we tax people too much on what they earn (income tax), own (capital gains tax) or want to bestow upon their children (inheritance tax), will we kill their ambition? will we destroy efficient and productive capital investment (to the extent that it exists)?

I don’t think inheritance taxes do much to deflate personal ambition. But I do would have the effect of taking capital out of the hands of individuals and putting it into the hands of the government, which would likely squander it. Also giving everyone 50k at age 18 would result in a lot of unproductive spending (though it might be good for luxury car manufactures and high end vacation peddlers).


"This means we need to restrict/slow down those people [talented], and give head starts to others [mediocre]."

The person of talent who recieves a smaller inheritance due to taxation is not restricted because of his or her talent. She is free to do whatever she wants with her talent. The tax affects what she receives (unearned) not what she does, or what she earns in the future. She can EARN a million or a billion dollars, she just can't bestow it upon her kids (who will have benefeted from the comparative advantage of going the best schools, being well travelled etc on mommy's dime until they reach age of 18).

Comment #74 - Posted by: Prole at July 10, 2009 10:34 AM

Do you think talent is unrelated to birth? Do you think it is YOUR right to determine how other people spend their money? How is your usurpation, through taxation, of EARNED income, not theft?

You know what I see? Mediocre people are poor, and talented people are rich. Most millionaires in this country are first generation, come from small towns, and earned everything through hard work, talent, and luck.

What is more natural than to leave your money to your children? What is more natural than to take a system that works--a person with demonstrated ability--and seek to continue it?

You are speaking in favor of RESENTMENT, not justice. OF COURSE failures want to blame other people. But if that becomes the American Way, the American Way will perish, permanently, in a pool of feeble minded, whiny mediocrity.

This may happen, no doubt--we may fail, and the architects may blame fate, or something else--but there is equally no doubt that it is preventable through the simple avoidance of do-gooder interference in systems that work now, and demonstrably stop working when they get their claws into them.

Comment #75 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 10, 2009 10:52 AM

What a day to miss rest day - but I won't say much via blackberry except this article raises many significant issues about liberty, the role of govt, and whether folks even understand the stakes any longer. Looks like a rich rest day, look forward to digesting it; but today, its the games, family and friends. Paul

Comment #76 - Posted by: apolloswabbie at July 10, 2009 10:52 AM

Musings from the Games...

1) Heavy fleece--check. Sunglasses--check. Sunblock.--check. Hangover...ugh, check.

2) Unknown and unknowable. Have you looked at the published events? Drive a spike into the ground? Seriously? Coach wasn't kidding when he said there would be stuff never seen before.

3) Family picnic. Annie Sakamoto and Rob Miller. Freddy C and the One World crew. Clan Martin here en masse. The Affiliate Cup is like the world's biggest barbecue. Dave Castro's Family Barbecue Gone Bad!

I'll be here, all weekend, to let you know what it's like...

Comment #77 - Posted by: Paul Szoldra at July 10, 2009 10:53 AM

Pics from Friday morning at the Ranch:


I'll post more photos throughout the weekend.

Comment #78 - Posted by: Playoff Beard at July 10, 2009 11:38 AM

Pics from the Ranch this morning:


Comment #79 - Posted by: Playoff Beard at July 10, 2009 11:39 AM

Sorry for the double post, I thought I was hung up in the filter :-)

Comment #80 - Posted by: Playoff Beard at July 10, 2009 11:40 AM

Is there anywhere were you can follow the games online except crossfitradio?

Comment #81 - Posted by: Torbjorn Granberg at July 10, 2009 11:41 AM

Bryan - #70

A couple reasons why affiliates would vary from the main page:

1 - Logistics - Class size, equipment, square footage and other factors may make some workouts less practical. For example, with a class of 15, the GHD sit up / back extension couplet would be difficult without 15 GHDs.

2 - Perceived value - Many members may feel like they're not getting their $ worth if they come in and are told to go run 10K. The affiliate may want to make sure the members feel like more coaching and instruction are being provided on all workouts.

3 - Owner's preference - It seems like affiliates are encouraged to create their own identity. I have looked at some, but not joined, and I've seen some that vary the workouts a lot, some that seem to favor metcons, and some that focus on strength + short metcons.

I don't know much about programming, and I pretty much just follow the mainpage. But I have also noticed what you mentioned - an affiliate with day after day of medium to long metcons. I even saw one that mixed in bicep curls! They're all alittle different, but I bet that if you talked to some about your goals, they may be able to help, even if it's not by following the mainpage.

Comment #82 - Posted by: ADG at July 10, 2009 11:59 AM

Barry my friend,

You sir are wrong in comment 75
Taxation on earnings is not theft it is slavery.

In America we like to think of ourselves as a nation of free persons. We have been lead to believe that Slavery ended with the Civil War. We have been mislead. Slavery still exists in America. We as Americans own nothing, not even ourselves.

Every year on the fifteenth day of April, we file our Federal Income Taxes. A statement declaring how much money we owe to the federal government based on how much money we earned that year. We think of income tax as a tax levied on the individual, it is not. Income tax is nothing more then the Federal Government exercising it’s ownership of its citizens.

Income tax is, in reality, rent paid by our employers to the federal government for the usage of its citizens. If you are a regular W2 employee, you never get to touch any of the money that the government takes in the form of income tax. It is simply “deducted” from your paycheck and sent off to Washington, with not one red cent passing through your hands.

If you are self-employed, and file a 1099, you are renting your own services from the federal government. The money passes through your hands, but the Federal Government even goes as far to tell you that you are your own business. In that regard it is still the employer not the employee footing the bill for Federal Income Tax.

The undeniable proof that the government regards you, as their property is what happens when rent is not paid for your services. If income tax is not paid then the government has the right to come and repossess you and take you to one of their facilities (prison).

Comment #83 - Posted by: Mike Morgan at July 10, 2009 1:09 PM

I definitely agree with bryan #70 and I would like to further elaborate on his post in that another big turn off for affiliates is that none near me at least offer any sort of independent option where you are not required to be there for classes. I would never make it to the gym at the same time, as I am in and out of town and go to the gym at different times when I am in town. I also will not say I have perfect form, but I have yet to be injured in 6 months of crossfit and I have gotten continually better. I say all this to say that when my globo membership is 39 bucks a month with about 90% of the equipment I need, I would gladly pay 50 or 60 for a crossfit box that simply let me use their equipment, but I cannot afford the 100+ dollars to attend classes only 3 times a week! I realize the fact that the benefits of a box are the close supervision that you get, but I don't think that should be mandatory.

Comment #84 - Posted by: Matt 23/m/185 at July 10, 2009 1:26 PM

GO NELSON!! GO FRAT!!! Big hugs and bad english for all...you are the best i wish i were there...have a great day...take care of Nelson please send pictures!!!

Comment #85 - Posted by: s'more at July 10, 2009 1:44 PM

I concur with #70. 3 affiliates in my town. WODs begin each day at 9am. I have to be at work long before then. And the programming here is WEAK. In addition, if you check the WOD blog you can quickly see what exercises the programmers like/dislike. With the mainsite you get exposed to everything (virtual shovel, driving stakes, etc.). On another note, anybody doing crossfit at Ft. Jackson SC. With all those running tracks and pull up bar contraptions. What a wonderful playground.

Comment #86 - Posted by: Alex at July 10, 2009 1:46 PM


You asked,

"Do you think talent is unrelated to birth? Do you think it is YOUR right to determine how other people spend their money? How is your usurpation, through taxation, of EARNED income, not theft?"

I ask: Do you think it is your right to get a free ride on the basis of your parent's efforts (or their grandparents' effort)?

I would define "theft" as the taking from a person that which she has earned.

It is not possible to steal that which a person "possesses" but has not earned, because that person has not mixed her labour with the thing she possesses, and therefore she has no proprietary "right" to it (lets take Locke to his logical extreme shall we?).

That which a person possess without earning stands in relation to a person as does a public watercourse or a navigable river - it can be used for a time, but the person has no right to exclude someone else from using it.

Mike Morgan,

The status of a tax payer is different from status of a slave because income taxes are levied by the elected representatives of a sovereign people according to the rule of law as set out in a republic constitution. They are not arbitrary, they are legitimate.

Everytime you use the word "government", you should substitute the words "citizens of the constitutional democratic republic of the United States".

The day the "citizens of the constitutional democratic republic of the United States" prohibit you from voting and require you to pay taxes is the day you will be a slave. Until then, you remain a citizen.

Comment #87 - Posted by: Prole at July 10, 2009 2:03 PM

Nothing like some hackneyed right-wing boilerplate to heal those sore legs!

Comment #88 - Posted by: psmitty at July 10, 2009 2:12 PM


i have to say, i don't understand where you are coming from at all.

you say:

"It is not possible to steal that which a person "possesses" but has not earned"

so, if you come take the bike i got for my birthday, it isn't theft? i possess the bike but i didn't earn it.

redistribution of wealth for any reason is wrong. nobody can know the best use of wealth. the only thing we can do is let the system decide what it is through the work of individuals. there is certainly no way that a government of any sort would know how best to use that wealth nor would an 18 year old youth.

i would argue that those with wealth educate their children from a young age to husband and grow that wealth. growing of that wealth is what grows the entire economy. redistributing that wealth to 18 year olds is throwing it away in most cases.

Comment #89 - Posted by: pta at July 10, 2009 2:14 PM

Mark Steyn makes some interesting points in the State Despotic but by failing to provide a vision of the responsibilities of the state he fails to provide an alternative other than vaguely pining for the 'good ol' days'.

He laments that citizens desire security from the state while he avoids the fact that the fundamental role of the state is to provide security to its citizens. So his argument then becomes one of choosing which types of securities should be provided by the state (at the federal level) and what freedoms are available to the citizens and corporations within the state.

Basically he is proposing that his concept (however ill or undefined) of the appropriate level of security provided by the state carries more weight than the other citizens; in other words he is promoting tyranny over democracy in the name of freedom.

The recent federal stimulus package could be easily funded by an equivalent reduction in the pentagon budget; then US citizens would be free to defend themselves from foreign invasion. Perhaps the contractor that built Mark Steyn's little bridge to nowhere would be able to replace the Army Corp of Engineers for pennies on the dollar.

When freedom has come to be implemented as the freedom for large corporations to foul the nations waterways, the freedom for health insurers to cut of their clients when they get sick and the freedom for banks to arbitrage billions of dollars from homeowners and taxpayers then yes I will accept some security on exchange for these 'freedoms'.

How that relates to the Crossfit Games, "Twins" by Jeff Tincher, or Crossfit by Overload I will need to leave for someone else.

Comment #90 - Posted by: KSW at July 10, 2009 2:24 PM

You finally stated what my problem is with all the affiliates in my area (San Antonio, TX). Most of their WODs are metcons and some of the trainers only have a Level 1 cert. I am not saying they aren't good trainers, I'm just saying that I have been doing CF for about 2 years now, longer than some of the trainers. Also, going along with what #84 said, when I asked local affiliates if they would give me a discount because I just wanted to be able to use the equipment, I was told that everyone had to take the classes because it promoted comraderie. All I need is the use of equipment and I don't have the $150+/Month money to be spending on memberships so I have a few small equipment items that I take with me to the globo gym because I only have to pay $30/month. But, this will not deter me. I will continue to CF my ass off and save money to build my own garage gym and then I can do whatever I want.

Comment #91 - Posted by: rebel4 at July 10, 2009 2:30 PM

This ideas presented in this article are very much those that Ron Paul, who ran for President this year, promotes.


Comment #92 - Posted by: Valery P. F/25/115/5'3" at July 10, 2009 3:09 PM

If you find the wsj article interesting then you should also check out the last 1/3 of the documentary "Zeitgeist". The video is viewable online.

Comment #93 - Posted by: Chris J at July 10, 2009 3:21 PM

It's a shame that every rest day article is a conservative piece, because when it really matters, as it does here, it's just grain in the wind.

This isn't about party, it's about how most American's cannot see the forest for the trees.

Piss on you folks who think I owe you something -- knock on my door and see if I give it to you myself, but don't ask a legislator to do it for you.

America used to stand for something, but now it's just an overstuffed chair in Europe's waiting room. Is this what we paid a blood price for, a floor show in the EU and the WTO?

You are responsible for yourself, and I am responsible for me. Where we meet in the middle is either charity or business, but don't ever assume they are the same.

Comment #94 - Posted by: chris at July 10, 2009 3:55 PM


Today I achieved a handstand push-up without a wall for the first time. CF always works. Thanks coach!

Comment #95 - Posted by: Derek O RCSD at July 10, 2009 4:08 PM


You would be correct if everyone who was eligible to vote also paid taxes, but they do not. According to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, 43.4% of Americans are not required to pay any federal income tax at all. And yet they are allowed to vote.

Therefore I am a slave to the government, and 43.4% of that government (atleast) is there to represent people who reap the fruit but do not share in the labor.

Comment #96 - Posted by: Mike Morgan at July 10, 2009 4:58 PM

the inheritance tax idea caused quite a stir!

look, i'm not dogmatic about it in any way. i meant to play the role of provocateur more than anything, and it seems like it worked.

as usual, prole, barry, and others -- good form. i don't dispute the difficulties, as well as shortcomings, of such a theoretical approach.

again, it just seems that for all of these calls for "freedom!" or "hard work, damn it!" stop short of a solution that i think would be hard worker's (or for those who are more patriotic than I, American) wet dream.

with that said, i hope you will grant me the same such ear.

i think it's hilarious that we still continue to debate whether more or less government intervention is a good thing. i don't think anybody can construct a coherent argument supporting the centralization of market forces, certainly not i. socialism is a major bust, and anybody who advocates it might be short of a few marbles. on the other hand, the fact that balls-out free marketism is still in vogue is equally as funny.

while being as kind as possible to the very intelligent people who support the latter view, i simply just don't get it.

what are property rights? they are necessary for markets to work. who regulates them? governments! what about the US FAA or FDA? while these agencies are problematic in their own right, would you fly in an aircraft not approved by the FAA, or not in communication with air traffic control? government planning certainly has its faults, but government regulation, which is at the very least some form of intervention, is absolutely necessary.

To move the discussion towards a more empirical footing: when i studied in china, a country whose gdp is growing nearly at 10% a year (which means that in every 20 years, their standard of living DOUBLES), the lack of regulation was astonishing. free market types love to point to china as an example where marketization = growth. Well, maybe.

ask anybody in china if they'd eat all the food available on the street. or keep appliances plugged in over night. hell, it's still recovering from a MILK and TOY scandal. and we're talking about a country that is said to overtake our own economy by 2050.

Sure, it’s growing. But what’s what mean? in china's case, proper governance and proper regulation is absolutely necessary for an actualization of higher living conditions. Being lifted out of poverty means nothing if none of you’ve got no public goods. growth means nothing, volume of trades or exchanges of goods means nothing, gdp means nothing, if it's not followed by improvements in good governance and sound oversight. in china's case, growth might be actually delaying the overthrow of a despotic regime. but thats another story.

as another example, look at somalia, mali, maybe even all of sub-Saharan africa. what kind of idiot would advocate privatization as a means to growth there? in places of the world where there is no civil society to speak of (couple billion of the world's population live in these conditions), lower taxes are not the answer, less government intervention is not the answer, doing away with a central bank is not the answer.

this might be out of the bounds of the conversation, but i hope to illuminate a key idea about free market theory: it is not universal, and it is not infallible. the fact that it's treated as gospel by some is really quite frightening.

it may work in certain conditions, like in a classroom, or where there is perfect competition, unrestricted access to goods and information, complete rationality of all of those who are involved, and little to no externalities associated with doing business, to name only a few. these conditions are ideal, and frankly, are as likely to occur as a benevolent dictator stewarding his centralized economy to great success.

What am I trying to say, and could’ve said in a single sentence is: a championing of absolutely unrestricted markets is as idiotic as socialism, which this article seems to imply we are sliding towards.

perhaps I have joined the ranks of FRAT.

Comment #97 - Posted by: tj at July 10, 2009 5:20 PM

oops, forgot to add:

most of that was directed at barry, so please fire away! you've got knowledge! i am interested to hear it! i want it! (not patronizing)

also, prole, i like this,

"The status of a tax payer is different from status of a slave because income taxes are levied by the elected representatives of a sovereign people according to the rule of law as set out in a republic constitution. They are not arbitrary, they are legitimate.

Everytime you use the word "government", you should substitute the words "citizens of the constitutional democratic republic of the United States".

The day the "citizens of the constitutional democratic republic of the United States" prohibit you from voting and require you to pay taxes is the day you will be a slave. Until then, you remain a citizen."

very insightful!

mike morgan,

there's no doubt our tax system is flawed. i'll give you that. but it's not sound logic to contend that just because our tax system is flawed, any and all forms of taxation are inherently immoral it's kind of a non sequitur.

tax systems are supposed to tax everybody, because they are supposed to allow a government to provide for everybody according to their need. that is the theory at least. you're right, usually it doesn't work like that. the privileged few can manipulate the system that the rest of us hold on our backs (atlas shrugged come to mind here?)

regardless, the fact that the system sucks doesn't make it evil.

Comment #98 - Posted by: tj at July 10, 2009 5:32 PM

well guys good luck to everybody at the games, specially to our lil pittbull from ecuador, nelson a.k.a begueta; dude think hard....live free...rule well, good luck from down here, c u in a couple of days.

guys, any site where you can watch the competition online alive? tks

Comment #99 - Posted by: alex_manguito, ec/m/32 at July 10, 2009 5:35 PM

I've been reading a great new book, "Born To Run" by Chris McDougall. I'll quote appropriately:

"Every action flick depicts the destruction of civilization as some kind of crash-boom-bang, a nuclear war or hurtling comet or a self-aware cyborg uprising, but the true cataclysm may already be creeping up right under our eyes: because of rampant obesity, one in three children born in the United States is at risk of diabetes - meaning, we could be the first generation of Americans to outlive our own children. Maybe the ancient Hindus were better crystal-ball gazers than Hollywood when they predicted the world would end not with a bang but with a big old yawn. Shiva the Destroyer would snuff us out by doing...nothing. Lazing out. Withdrawing his hot-blooded force from our bodies. Letting us become slugs."

So well is this known by those who would propose to lead us via a bigger and bigger state entity. Entropy is a disgusting force, but less so than that which uses it to further its own control through slow, insidious growth. The state despotic.

Those opposing Steyn's eulogy in this thread - let's face it, that's what he has written - argue, basically and (astonishingly) openly that the very human strengths that built this country have represented a failed experiment. The use of the term "failed policies" has been so ubiquitous in the past nine months that I think many may not see the target of that term: The sources of America's greatness.

The fault does not lie with those sources. They are hunger for life, hunger to go faster, hunger to be stronger, hunger to do more. They are in us all, and it has been only in an environment that frees people to pursue that hunger - the New World - that such a great country as America could be created.

But the concept of equality among men has been perverted to such a degree that it is unrecognizeable from its initial meaning - equality of opportunity. Rather, it is now the club, in the form of equality of outcome, used to punish success through redistribution.

A man has a successful career, amassing wealth? Take that wealth to distribute it to those less successful, thus punishing the success and rewarding the failure. Even worse, increase the state while doing so, adding to the rolls of wards who thus learn not only that the state will supplement individual labor, but also that successful labor would result in a loss of the state's support.

Those opposing the inheritance tax are correct in my opinion, but their argument should be supported by the correlary that, should heirs be raised properly and imbued with the hunger that created their found wealth, their efforts would increase popular wealth to a far greater degree than would the state's use of their inheritance.

Therein lies the fight. Hunger for life exists through all levels of success; it starts at the bootstraps, it carries one through the middle, it is the very essence of the billionaire who still gets to the office at six in the morning or the All-Star who still practices hours longer than his competitors. At each stage, the opposing argument beckons. Why pull at the bootstraps? The state provides far better sustenance than that entry-level job. Why continue to struggle up the ladder? You're comfortable now, just ride along with a paycheck this size, or go union to ensure you can't backslide even as you coast. You've reached the top, why keep going?

The state despotic suggests - it never argues, only suggests - that it can take it from here.

At this point, the state is winning with a benevolent smile, arguing against the "failed policies of the past" and trusting that the public defines this term in years, while its true meaning stretches two and a half centuries.

Comment #100 - Posted by: Chas at July 10, 2009 8:49 PM


Gifts? I don't know. If I make an exception for gifts then inheritance taxes could be avoided simply by having a person gift her entire estate gifted before dying.


To say that the use of the term "failed policies" is to condemn 250 years of American history as a "failed experiment" is to identify the American experiment with Bush. Some people may make that identification - I don't. I identify the American experiment with people like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Jackie Robinson, James Madison, Andrew Carnegie, Susan B. Anthony, Walt Whitman, Mary Harris Jones.

Those who hunger for life, speed, strength, (I'll add dignity, freedom, equality, education) are not somehow by their hunger made members of the anti-union, anti-security, anti-redistribution, pro-libertarian brotherhood.

Do you think for a second that progessive income taxes achieve equality of outcomes? Do you think a person who earns 200k but pays 100k in tax, has anywhere near an outcome equal to the person who earns 0k pays no tax, and receives 8k in public benefits?

Equality of outcomes is not the goal of a progressive tax system or a state-administered welfare benefit. Mitigation of social harms resulting from severe and widespread inequality of outcomes is the goal (especially for children who have no role to play in affecting their own "outcomes" on a monthly or annual basis).

The trick is to keep the tax rate at a level where personal ambition thrives and social harm from severe inequality can be mitigated by state distribution of limited benefits.

The minimum wage in California is $8, in NY State $7.15, Texas $7.25 (will be as of July 24, 2009).

So in California if you work 160 hrs a month you make $1360, in NY $1144, in Texas $1160. I can't find official statistics for monthly welfare rates in these states but my estimate based on what I have seen is that the rates range from $375 (low end in Texas) to $600 (high end in California), and that with food-stamps these numbers would likely rise between $100 and $200. In NJ for instance, a family of 3 is ineligible for financial assistance or food stamps once its income rises above $638 per month. If I am even in the ball park with these numbers (please correct my estimates if you are able) it is clear that the state does not provide far better than entry level jobs. These numbers indicate that there is no equality of outcome between even an "entry level" minimum wage earner and a welfare recipient, let alone a person in a low-paying $20k per year job, or a person who earns the ghastly sum of 50k per year, or the impossibly large sum of $100k.

Say the state is too big, say its size threatens the liberty of you and your fellow citizens, but please, refrain from saying that progressive income taxes and welfare are somehow (the worst of all insults) "unAmerican".

Comment #101 - Posted by: Prole at July 10, 2009 11:37 PM

Love this one!

Weighted pull-ups, Strict Pull-ups, Kipping Pull-ups

As Rx’d

13:08 PR by 1:02
10 sets Pr by 10 sets (used dumbbell instead of belt so no getting off bar to take off weight)

Comment #102 - Posted by: Rich G 43/5'7"/183 at July 11, 2009 6:24 AM

Love this one!

Weighted pull-ups, Strict Pull-ups, Kipping Pull-ups

As Rx’d

13:08 PR by 1:02
10 sets PR by 10 sets (used dumbbell instead of belt so no getting off bar to take off weight)

Comment #103 - Posted by: Rich G 43/5'7"/183 at July 11, 2009 6:26 AM

The quality of the Wall Street Journal is clearly declining. What a shame. Used to be such a great paper.

Comment #104 - Posted by: fuller at July 11, 2009 12:42 PM

Am I the only one who can't access the Games link? the link keeps crashing.

I'm desperate to see the results but can't get through

Comment #105 - Posted by: nick in sydney m/37/6ft/183 at July 11, 2009 2:06 PM

Principle 1: Intellectuals are not workers.

Corrollary: Intellectuals are not the "People", in whose name they want to arrogate all power over our economic and political processes to themselves. Obama--like Marx, like Lenin, like Hitler--has never had a real job. He has never even practiced law full time, from what I can tell. He has been a politician, agitator, and law professor. What he did in college we can't tell since he has cut all of those records off from public access.

Prole, the history of the basic idea you are advocating--the right of self proclaimed do-gooders to appropriate wealth they call "unearned" in the name of the people--is one of UNMITIGATED EVIL. It was the principle by means of which armed, jack-booted thugs invaded the homes of the "bourgeoisie" in pretty much every revolution ever waged, took their things, raped their women, killed or imprisoned the men and children, and called it justice.

This is history. This happened. This is not speculative.

Your premise is that people are born equal in talents and capabilities. They aren't. Black people, for example, are in general inferior in IQ to white people and Asians. We can argue that environmental factors are responsible for this, and maybe they are. Surely, though, they have control over whether they make use of the FREE education the rest of us pay for? Yes? Can we agree that if someone else starts out 100 yards ahead, and I offer to cede you 50 yards on them and you are too lazy to make use of it, offering you 125 yards in exchange for no effort on your part is also wasted?

One of my vendors is a second generation, family run firm. The father started it, and taught his son how to run it for substantially his whole life. These things normally fail in the third generation, with no help from the government. However, for the time being, it is being run EFFICIENTLY, relatively speaking, since rather than being an Affirmative Action candidate, he is the son of the guy who had the balls, brains, and grit to make it work in the first place. He has passed along both his genetics, and his knowledge.

What you are arguing for, first, is essentially unlimited power in the hands of bureaucrats. If the money is taken, it has to go somewhere. If it has to be spent, it WILL be spent, and we can ASSUME that since efficiency is foreign to the enterprise, this CAPITAL that someone else amassed through talent, work, and luck, will be given to people who have never produced ANYTHING. ANYTHING. PARASITES will control this money: people whose jobs depend on other peoples taxes.

Secondly, what you are arguing for is punishing the successful, and empowering the mediocre. If the money is taken from people who have earned it--who has shown a capacity for production--and given to, who? People people like YOU determine are unfairly disadvantaged by being lazy and stupid.

This nation BENDS OVER BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS to apologize for the vestiges of racism. You know what? Every time I go to the Dept. of Motor Vehicles downtown, I see hordes of people NO AMOUNT OF MONEY IS GOING TO MAKE SMART.

But what we CAN do is bankrupt our nation giving handouts to people like Warren Buffet, who is brash enough to call for more "Stimulus" money to be doled out to companies like GE that he has large stakes in.

Enough is enough. I, and many people like me are getting SICK TO OUR STOMACHS WITH THIS STUPIDITY AND CRIME. You all are providing a stimulus to a political revolt that is going to wide and deep enough to once and finally reverse the mental and emotional sickness that has been dragging this once great nation into the mud since FDR.

Comment #106 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 12, 2009 9:29 AM

I'm reading Henry Hazlitt's book "Economics in one lesson". It is profoundly frustrating and disturbing to me to see, clearly, that EVERY ridiculous fallacy of the Obama administration, and Democratic hegemony, was refuted as silly by him in 1946.

Obama's policies will increase the wealth of a very few--highway contractors, Warren Buffet, Al Gore--but in general will create inflation, greater unemployment, greater governmental control of all aspects of our lives, and an overall DECREASE in our standard of living. This is quite simply inevitable, given the premises involved in this process.

Inner city poor? Their job opportunities will shrink. College graduates? Their job opportunities, increasingly, will be overseas, if they exist at all.

Tax rates have ALREADY gone up. We have spent an enormous amount of money we didn't have. Unless we choose bankrupcy--which in the end we may--we are borrowing jobs from the future, to fund them today. We are borrowing from assumed FUTURE prosperity, to fund pseudoprosperity today.

Men like Paul Krugman who are providing the intellectual underwriting for this are little more than crooks. He is knowingly deceiving the American people, presumably in support of ideological goals only a moral simpleton could see as desirable.

It may not be obvious, but there is a yawning chasm in front of us. It is quite possible we no longer deserve freedom. It is hard--very hard--for me to imagine that we are STILL making the mistakes that created the first Great Depression.

Comment #107 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 12, 2009 11:16 AM


Here Al Gore explicitly cites the Waxman-Markey Bill--designed to address all contingencies of cooling, warming, and staying the same, through a massive new tax on energy production--as paving the way to "global governance".

The technocrats in Europe have nothing on those trying to shove this crap down our throats.

This in a year noted by profound cooling. The AGW cultists have an answer for this, though: global cooling is offsetting the global warming. It is so obvious, how would one not think of that?

Now where the global cooling is coming from, and why they didn't predict it until it was well under way, well those are details for all but the "deniers", right?

Wake up, people, unless you want to be told when to wipe your nose, and what time to get up in the morning, where to work, and what exercise is "safe" and which isn't.

Can anyone seriously believe that banning CrossFit has not crossed any do-gooders mind?

Comment #108 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 12, 2009 11:48 AM


You wrote:

"Black people, for example, are in general inferior in IQ to white people and Asians. Surely, though, they have control over whether they make use of the FREE education the rest of us pay for? Yes?"

In your mind, what the attributes of a racist?

If you do not believe this portion of your post at #106 that I have quoted was racist, I wonder if you would oblige me with a little homework assignment:

- by making as few modifications as possible, please transform the quoted statement into a racist one.

Do you see anything objectionable in your at #106 phrase "raped their women"? I do.

I gave you several numbers to chew on at #101 - too bitter?

Comment #109 - Posted by: Prole at July 12, 2009 7:00 PM

Sorry Barry,

I misquoted you, missed a sentence, should have stated:

"Black people, for example, are in general inferior in IQ to white people and Asians. We can argue that environmental factors are responsible for this, and maybe they are. Surely, though, they have control over whether they make use of the FREE education the rest of us pay for? Yes?"

- homework task remains the same.

Do you think progressive income taxes benefit only "black people"?

Do you feel a little queazy when you make generalizations about "black people"? When you speak about "black people" do you have a clear sense of what you mean by a black person? When you contrast them (oh I'm feeling queazy) with other "types of people" (really queazy) do you have a clear sense of what defines these other people as members of a "people" or "races" (or whatever other 19th C colonial, imperial, eugenic designator you feel at home with)?

Could we add a second principle to your Principle #1 (that intellectuals are not workers)?

Principle #2: "Area sales managers are not workers".

If not, why?

You are reading a book entitled "Economics in one lesson" and you have discovered it's nailed it all. I've always said, if something is tough, if it's complicated, if it might take effort to understand and master, if it can't be taught (or learned) in one lesson (lets say, economics, or the US Constitution, or playing shortstop, or riding a bike), well f-ck, it's either bs, or not worth learning.

Comment #110 - Posted by: Prole at July 12, 2009 8:24 PM


Reframed, you won't read it, because it might shatter the stupidities with which you routinely shower us. For example, it is PROVEN, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the effect of Minimum Wage Laws is to INCREASE UNEMPLOYMENT. Hazlitt deals with this at length.

Hell, you aren't someone who reads things likely to conflict with your very comfortable sense of self righteousness, so let me explain.

In a free market, wages are prices. They are allocated according to supply and demand. When you enact minimum wage regulation, you reduce the options of the less qualified. For example, if you are compelled, by law, to pay someone $500/week for whatever, then you will not, ever, for any reason, hire someone worth less than that.

For people worth less than that, they are shut out of the employment market. They are then paid Welfare or some form of unemployment, which is an added tax levied on the productive.

Now, let us say that unemployment is $400/week (self proclaimed "progessives" insist that it must be close to that paid to the actually employed), so that means those who MIGHT be seeking jobs will, if they get them, in effect be working for $100/week, from their perspective. This skews the analysis, and reduces those who are actually willing to work.

In France and any other nation with very high Minimum wages, unemployment is endemic and long standing. It will never go away. Ever. Ever.

Racist: that's easy. It's someone who bases his decisions upon prejudicial conceptions of groups as a whole, rather than the characteristics of individuals. Did I say all black people are stupid? No. Did I say that, in general, black IQ's are lower than those of white people? Yes. This is a fact. I challenge you to dispute it. No doubt this FACT makes you hyperventilate. No doubt this FACT makes you want to change the subject, or pretend that the ability to do math, use spatial imagination, know common facts, or use the English language correctly are foreign to what REALLY matters. However, that is simply not accurate. Did I say there are no stupid white people? No, I didn't, and in point of fact there are far MORE stupid white people in this nation than black people. This is inevitable, since we are by far the majority group in this nation.

The truth hurts. That's why leftists feel a continuing and strong need to abuse it by either lying or pretending there is no such thing.

Sales managers produce things. They rationalize the efforts of those working to increase the volume and speed of demand, which spurs further production, which creates jobs, which creates taxes.

One would have to be an intellectual to make such a weak argument. My point stands.

Further: I was at a downtown fountain yesterday, where I saw a lot of low income folks swimming. I looked at them, and thought: there is a best use for these people. They can be good at manufacturing, or tattooing, or delivering, or something else.

By what principle of "justice" is it claimed that those who are unequal in talent should be equal in outcome? Necessarily--NECESSARILY, INESCAPABLY--the idea that the less productive should enjoy fruits GREATER than their capacity to create them implies that such people should be FORCED by fiat to take on roles greater than those to which they are equal. It is the Peter Principle, encoded into law.

Worse: the Peter Principle states that people are promoted to their level of incompetence. In socialism, they are promoted FAR PAST their level of incompetence, and KEPT THERE BY FORCE OF LAW.

How, on earth, can anyone older than the age of 5 claim that ANY economic system could be built that would reliably produce wealth that is based on some concept other than rewarding the best and brightest?

I have asked this before, and will ask again: WHAT IS YOUR IDEAL SOCIETY? Is it Cuba? Is it what the Soviet Union SHOULD have been, or China SHOULD have been? Cambodia? Is it just the bad luck of history that every radical project has led to generalized tyranny and poverty?

And yes, the Cheka, in appropriating the wealth of the "bourgeoisie", also appropriated their wives. They kept them in brothels, where--after they were done killing for the day--they would relax with orgies of cocaine, vodka, and rape.

THIS IS HISTORICAL FACT. Does that bother you? It bothers me.

Early Chinese Communists would kill AND EAT their enemies. Does that bother you? It bothers me.

Mao's disastrously bad policies produced famine, which led to Chinese villagers eating their own children? So did the policies of the Soviets. Does that bother you? It bothers me.

No doubt, The Black Book of Communism would be another wet blanket on your narcissistic sense that your politics help someone, somewhere.

I'll be posting my summaries on the economic crisis, and healthcare momentarily. Feel free to start the ad hominem without taking the trouble to read them. Actual use of facts and logic are, as is well shown by any long term reader of these discussion, foreign to the Leftists sense of moral entitlement.

Comment #111 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 13, 2009 9:16 AM

Here is my summary of the roots of the economic crisis: http://www.lulu.com/content/e-book/roots-of-the-current-economic-slowdown-simplified/7394817

I think it is accurate, covers the most important points, and does not neglect anything important.

There is so much idiocy surrounding this issue, that it hard to see the forest for pile of fertilizer.

Likewise with Health Care: http://www.lulu.com/content/e-book/health-insurance-in-9-paragraphs/7394856

9 Paragraphs. How much shorter can you make a complex issue? We already have healthcare for the very poor, handicapped, and old. These exist already. The new proposals are not trying to touch those. The question is, how do we improve things for everyone else? Answer: more competition. And a massive new Federal Bureaucracy and tax burden is the OPPOSITE of a good answer to that question.

Comment #112 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 13, 2009 11:05 AM

Finally, I wanted to dilate on race for a moment. If we took the motivational and intellectual characteristics of your average inner city black, and applied them to the very, very many poor whites in their social demographic, we would find it unexceptional that they were not achieving at high rates. In point of fact, trailer parks stay full, and many poor whites live off the public dole their entire lives. Most of our welfare--in all its forms--goes, in fact to white people.

The salient issue is not race, per se, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT RACE IS MADE BY LEFTISTS A POLITICAL ISSUE. When Jerry Wright says "damn America", what he is implicitly claiming is that somebody should have helped black people help themselves. It is OUR fault that Chicago, and Washington, DC, and Detroit are battle zones.

Yet, it is PRECISELY the policies advocated by Wright that have been implemented, and these have been the results. This was inevitable.

Comment #113 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 13, 2009 11:10 AM

Minimum wage?

I thought we were talking about inheritance taxes and redistribution.

You wrote:

"Your premise is that people are born equal in talents and capabilities. They aren't. Black people, for example, are in general inferior in IQ to white people and Asians. We can argue that environmental factors are responsible for this, and maybe they are. Surely, though, they have control over whether they make use of the FREE education the rest of us pay for? Yes?"

You attempted to counter my premise (which was not my premise) that people are born with equal talents and capabilites, by making the statement that blacks are generally inferior to whites and Asians with respect to IQ tests.

What was your point Barry?

And here:

"If we took the motivational and intellectual characteristics of your average inner city black, and applied them to the very, very many poor whites in their social demographic, we would find it unexceptional that they were not achieving at high rates. In point of fact, trailer parks stay full, and many poor whites live off the public dole their entire lives. Most of our welfare--in all its forms--goes, in fact to white people."

You compare average inner city black kids with poor white kids, not poor black kids with poor white kids. You see Barry, as far as intellectual abilities go it is the poverty of the kid that matters, not the colour of the poor kid's skin.

Barry, I have never, not once, in the many thousands of words I have spilled into this forum argued for equality of outcomes. I have argued for something approaching an equal starting point, a fair playing field, shorter head starts. I have also argued for a minimum below which we allow no human being to suffer privation.

You ask me what my ideal society would be? China? USSR? Cuba? Cambodia? - No. No. No. No. I don't believe in ideal societies.

I like the institutions of the United States, of Canada, and Australia, of Britain. These nations are constitutional democracies that afford their citizens great personal freedoms, democratic and minority rights, and social security.

Comment #114 - Posted by: Prole at July 13, 2009 2:48 PM

I will respond tomorrow. I've already addressed your points, but will do so again.

Comment #115 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 13, 2009 3:55 PM

But Social Security is bankrupt. And every totalitarian movement in history has had, in its infancy, a majority of moderates such as you say you are. It didn't matter, in the end, once the hard liners got the possibility of abusing power in their hands. This is the project of the Left.

I will write a piece on race, as I view it, particularly the rhetorical game it has enabled in which debates do not focus on outcomes based on principles, but simply on getting from here to smear in as few moves as possible. Once you can reliably and with even a shred of credibility paint someone as a racist/imperialist, or "tool of the capitalist running dogs", the debate is over. You need say no more, and it matters not an iota how much objectively better the other persons ideas might be at HELPING THE VERY PEOPLE LEFTISTS CLAIM THEY CARE ABOUT.

Net, net: Obama is trying to nationalize the experiments in Detroit and the South side of Chicago. Same ideas, larger scale. Capital will be sucked by force of law into unproductive uses, law will be corrupted to support an increasingly ruinous status quo, and our democracy will be transformed, if this process continues, into something that is democratic in name only.

Only a fraction of the "stimulus" funds Obama claimed were so desperately needed have hit the "street". Many of them won't hit until 2010. They will be inflationary, and disruptive. Presumably he wants to delay those effects until after the mid-term elections. He has the patronage in place he needs--the bill has passed--so there's no need to gum up the works--which is inevitable--until after the next election.

He knows he needs two terms to fully corrupt our system, at least. Most people who voted for him have no idea what he really (seems) to stand for.

Certainly, one would have expected more media coverage if a blonde haired, blue eyed man with no track record had run, whose biological father and mother, Grandfather, paternal stand-in in his teenage years, pastor, and most important political influence had all been Nazis. Is it unreasonable to suppose that perhaps he shares some of their views?

Comment #116 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at July 15, 2009 10:00 AM

Did Linda today, 9 July. Scaled it slightly

Brutal as always 42:11

Comment #117 - Posted by: Joe Casale/m/35yo/5'5"/170lbs at July 15, 2009 1:55 PM

Deadlift: 5-5-5-5-5-2-2

Finished somewhere around 365 (but don't remember exactly due to late posting):

Comment #118 - Posted by: Julio V m/31/5'5/201 at August 18, 2009 7:33 AM

icmia6779 http://1lib.com/1fea - Arka Woolrich Woolrich Parka RatenzahlungWoolrich Parka Review?http://tiny.tw/3dfs - Woolrich Uk Sale Woolrich Parka ReviewsWoolrich Parka RomaWoolrich Parka Rosso UomoWoolrich Parka RotWoolrich Parka SaleWoolrich Parka Sale DamenWoolrich Parka Sale MenWoolrich Parka Sale Uk.ptsb289 http://x.co/2oSzC - Woolrich Woolen Mills Online Store ucne948 http://x.co/2oTOs - Woolrich Clothing Woolrich Parka San FranciscoWoolrich Parka Sand,http://tinyurl.com/kkuw29j - Woolrich Negozio Woolrich Parka ShopWoolrich Parka Shop OnlineWoolrich Parka ShopstyleWoolrich Parka Size ChartWoolrich Parka Sizing.mskuy5047 http://x.co/2oTdG - Woolrich Parka Coats zqlj755 http://url.ceenovancia.com/szp - Woolrich Store Woolrich Parka Spaccio BolognaWoolrich Parka StockholmWoolrich Parka Stockists. http://yourls.endinahosting.com/1l4r - Spaccio Woolrich Woolrich Parka Su EbayWoolrich Parka Toronto,qhtw548 http://of.vg/etR - Parka Woolrich Woolrich Parka TurchiaWoolrich Parka Turkey?http://goo.gl/LBOj7R - Outlet Woolrich Milano Woolrich Parka UkWoolrich Parka UnisexWoolrich Parka UomoWoolrich Parka Uomo 2010.usrhb0952 http://nn.sg/22pt - Woolrich Parka Woolrich Parka Uomo 2011Woolrich Parka Uomo BiancoWoolrich Parka Uomo Blu,http://yaylink.com/7jdg - Giubbotti Woolrich rdbk858? http://x.co/2oStn - Woolrich Parkas Woolrich Parka Uomo CollezzioniWoolrich Parka Uomo Ebay,http://x.co/2oSzj - Woolrich Store Woolrich Parka Uomo OfferteWoolrich Parka Uomo OutletWoolrich Parka Uomo PrezziWoolrich Parka Uomo Prezzo.rxug129 http://x.co/2oTOv - Woolrich Store ldbyg6052 http://gg.gg/nuow - Woolrich Parka Outlet Woolrich Parka Uomo RomaWoolrich Parka Uomo RossoWoolrich Parka Uomo Usato.

Comment #119 - Posted by: Cobagssepd at November 14, 2013 4:14 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?